reen energy. and also each other. digital tools so impressive, you just can't stop. what would you like the power to do? good day, everybody. welcome to "meet the press daily." i'm chuck todd on a truly historic day here in washington. later this hour, we expect the united states senate to vote on and confirm ketanji brown jackson as the next supreme court justice when stephen breyer officially retires. he's put in his papers but actually will finish this supreme court term, for what it's worth. a vote will make her the first black woman ever to sit on the nation's highest court. we'll take you to the senate as the vote is taking place, which we expect at the back end of this hour. some other breaking news on the other end of pennsylvania
avenue, moments ago the white house announced that president biden is not considered a close contact of house speaker nancy pelosi, who herself announced today that she has tested positive for covid. you're looking at video of the two of them together at an event just yesterday. now, the white house says the president tested negative last night. pelosi's office says she is fully vaccinated and boosted and is currently asymptomatic. but we're going to begin with the war in ukraine. secretary of state tony blinken just wrapped up his day of meetings with nato allies. before the day's meetings here's what the ukrainian foreign minister had to say about what he wanted. >> my agenda is very simple. it has only three items on it. it's weapons, weapons, and weapons. i call on all allies to put aside their hesitations, their reluctance, to provide ukraine with everything it needs because as weird as it may sound, but
today weapons serve the purpose of peace. >> blinken told reporters minutes ago that the u.s. will not let anything stand in the way of sending arms to ukraine and the biden administration is looking at what additional weaponry it can send. the u.n. general assembly voted to suspend russia from its human rights council position in response to its actions in ukraine. all of this comes as the pentagon said for the first time yesterday that they think ukraine could actually win this war as russian forces have completely withdrawn from kyiv and its surrounding areas. the military's top commander told congress this morning that russia is regrouping and may be preparing for a new, more narrowly focused but brutal offensive and that this war may be far from over. >> what does winning look like? i think winning is ukraine remains a free and independent nation like it's been since 1991 with their territorial integrity intact. that's going to be very difficult. it's going to be a long slog.
this is not an easy fight they are involved in. >> how do you define territorial integrity? well, those are questions we have as well. on the ground in ukraine, the carnage continues. mariupol is the target of intense shelling. as many as 5,000 people have been killed since the war began and the city has been absolutely destroyed. just ask yourself, look at what we've discovered in bucha after the russians have left. i think we're all bracing ourselves for what we're going to learn in mariupol when we truly have a full picture there. i'm joined by molly hunter in kyiv for us, courtney kube at the pentagon, and our guest today, the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine, now a senior director of the eurasia center. molly, yesterday right at this time i asked you does it feel as if the russians have left and you're like, yeah, well, i'm still hearing stuff. literally as i'm asking you this question, i think i'm hearing it. so there's still some
indiscriminate air attacks happening, is there not? >> reporter: yeah. this is the first siren we've heard for a few hours, chuck. there is. but the big picture in kyiv, as we've been discussing is that russian troops have left the suburbs. russian troops have retreated to belarus. they have been pushed back. because of that we have gotten eyes on those suburbs but we're still hearing sirens. there are absolutely still clearly warnings of shellings on the outskirts of kyiv. kyiv, though, is absolutely the strategic win that ukraine has had so far. just keeping an eye on the horizon, chuck. >> i totally get that. look, we heard from the foreign minister today and he said weapons, weapons, weapons. he added we hope some countries that have been reluctant will stop being reluctant. who is he speaking to? what weaponry is he not getting that he'd like. he's not mentioning no-fly zone or hearing about the migs.
so is it these air defense systems, the s-300? is that what he's talking about? >> reporter: yeah, he's talking about something much bigger than shoulder mounted javelins. as we were driving through bucha and irpin, we saw the recommend remnants of javelins that we know have been so successful against tanks. we have seen those destroy tanks that have been ruined because of am bushes. but he did say he is giving a list to nato members. he has given specific supply orders. aircraft, armored vehicles, and additional air defense missiles. even with this strategic win in kyiv, russia is still the better supplied, bigger, larger army and they're going to need some bigger help. >> molly, i want to let you go. it's obviously disconcerting for
you to do a live shot in the middle of those air raid sirens, so go protect yourself and the crew. thank you. >> reporter: okay. let me move to courtney kube at the pentagon. courtney, i want to get to you and these weapons systems. the foreign minister is clearly -- there's some nato nations maybe not ready to give. what or who is he referring to? >> so, it's not so much -- it's a combination of things. it's not even so much that they're not willing to give because they don't want to help ukraine, it's more about concerns that they hurt their own readiness. we're talking specifically about some of the countries right there around ukraine. there's been some reporting about potentially sending some t-72 tanks, the old russian tanks, to ukraine and some of the neighbors, some of the allies who have that, who have some of those supplies aren't able to do so because they don't want to hurt their own readiness. but the things that u.s. officials that we've spoken with say ukraine really needs right now include air defenses.
as you just mentioned. that is because the expectation is that russia right now are refitting, readying themselves for the next phase of this campaign. we're already seeing the very early, early stages of that in the eastern part of the country. but that they will then focus on that eastern part of the country with a new -- a new phase of the campaign that will include air launch long-range systems, air strikes, cruise missile strikes. the kinds of thing that ukraine needs more systems to defend against. in addition to that they're asking for more anti-aircraft. so things to take out russian helicopters like the stingers that we've heard. there is an expectation that we'll see a lot of russian tanks used again, as we did around kyiv, as we did around kharkiv. that's why the u.s. and other nations are still sending some of these anti-armor, anti-tank weapons like the javelins, chuck. >> i want to play something else that general milley said today while testifying on capitol hill. take a listen. >> so i think it's an open
question right now how this ends. ideally, putin decides to cease-fire, stop his aggression, and there's some sort of diplomatic intervention but right now that doesn't look like it's on the horizon. >> so, courtney, it does seem as if the strategy now is they want to see how much of the east they can control before they start sending down. >> that's right. the russian military has decided that they had three big mistakes in the early phase of this campaign. one was just they spread themselves too thin. they had these three major lines of axes, the one in the north towards kyiv, the one in the east that was really way too disparate and the one in the south focused down toward mariupol, mykolaiv and crimea. they have realized they cannot sustain an invasion on three major axes. so the belief is they're consolidating, move in on the east and focus on the south-southeast part of the country. another big problem that the
russians have realized is their logistical ineptitude and we saw that mainly around kyiv. if they're focusing down on the donbas they have a much better logistical supply coming from russia, coming up from donbas and coming up from crimea and the sea of azov, from the waterways there where they have a huge russian naval presence. the third, though, is they really underestimated the terrain in many of the areas that they moved into. well, they know that area around the donbas area. they have been fighting there for eight years. so the belief is then with those three major changes that it will be a much more brutal, more violent effort that they'll take down there on the donbas, that's why we're hearing things from secretary of defense lloyd austin and general mark milley about this next phase being more deliberate and more violent and why we're not hearing any of them spike the football, despite the fact that there has been this retreat from kyiv.
there's an acknowledgement that as general milley said today, there's the potential for this still to be a very long slog going forward. and any kind of ukrainian victory is definitely not assured at this point, chuck. >> all right. let me go to that next step in this conversation, courtney kube at the pentagon for us. thank you. let me bring in john herbst, a former u.s. ambassador to ukraine. ambassador, it's good to see you again. so how do we get putin to the negotiating table on terms that could be more favorable to ukraine at this point? >> we hope ukraine defeat them on the battlefield. it really is that simple. >> well, the east is going to be tough. and what concerns do you have when it comes to the ability of europe to stick with this, the ability of nato to keep bringing in weapons, and, you know, as courtney describes it and i wonders, ambassador, if you have the similar view, that this is
going to get uglier. >> it will get uglier. but milley said ukraine could win, it's going to be a long war and that should guide us. blinken said we're not going to let weapons get in the way of ukraine's victory, we're going to provide them what they need. so what that means is we have to get to ukraine now all the things they're asking for. some things we have not been able to consider in the past. get the high altitude anti-aircraft systems from our east european nato allies. secondly, they need more anti-ship missiles. if we can get to the mariupol area, they can take out the russian ships that is helping put russian supplies and troops on the ground to take mariupol. we should send not just the switchblade drones but drones with a more explosive impact and a broader range. we should help ukraine get tanks. we should help them get what we are going to be retiring, bradley combat vehicles.
we need to get ukraine aircraft. the administration secretly reverse their decision, get their migs to ukraine and for the first time ever get ahead of the russians and begin to train ukraine on our f-16s which we are going to be retiring. it's going to be a long war, let's get ukraine those f-16s too. >> you know, ambassador -- go ahead, finish that thought. >> we do all those things and i think the chances of moscow losing in this new offensive go way up. >> it's interesting, you bring up the mig issue and some of these other things and bring in other weapons like this. there's been a concern of the administration that somehow this will escalates in the mind of putin. is this a time when we should take a page from putin's book? what migs, what weapons are you talking about, vlad? >> your advice is exactly the right one. we should do it, we should do it
quietly. and we have allowed putin to deter us with his threatening of nuclear escalation. we need to remember if we accept him deterring us in ukraine with threats of nuclear escalation, what happens when he comes in the balkan states. let's beat putin in ukraine, with ukrainians doing the fighting. >> there is this point and i think everybody is trying to figure out when do you reach it and when do you go too far. we've made putin a pariah on the world stage temporarily. is there a point we make him such a pariah he will never come to the negotiating table? and sort of in a way like post world war i germany. is there a point you push it too far? >> look, i understand why people want to make him a pariah because he's presiding over a war of aggression where he's committing numerous war crimes. what's happening in mariupol will look like what's happened
in irpin to be nothing. having said that, the most important thing is to beat him on the battlefield. we should talk less and do more. putin is definitely a war criminal. i'm not certain we need to say that every day. we simply need to provide ukrainians the mean to defeat him. >> the other thing i'm curious about and you know the ukrainians much better than so many others, territorial integrity. a lot of people have used that term. this is victory for them. but what is in that definition? because nobody wants to define what territorial integrity is of ukraine right now it seems. >> well, we know what it actually means. that would include the territory that was in kyiv's control at the end of 2013. it would include crimea and those parts of the donbas which moscow has occupied. having said that, i don't think
people want to define it precisely because they want to let zelenskyy and the ukrainian government decide what are the terms they would be willing to make peace. i can speculate what they are but it's better for the ukrainians to lay that out. >> former ambassador john herbst, a former u.s. ambassador to ukraine, really appreciate you coming on and sharing your perspective with us. it's always a pleasure. still to come, president biden's domestic agenda seems like it's about to come to a screeching halt after the supreme court confirmation vote that's expected to begin in the next hour. congresswoman jayapal will join us after the break. you're watching "meet the press daily." watching "meet the pres daily.
i'm mark and i live in vero beach, florida. my wife and i have three children. ruthann and i like to hike. we eat healthy. we exercise. i noticed i wasn't as sharp as i used to be. my wife introduced me to prevagen and so i said "yeah, i'll try it out." i noticed that i felt sharper, i felt like i was able to respond to things quicker.
when it comes to tech, everyone wants the next best thing. now with xfi complete from xfinity, you can get updated wifi technology with the new tech upgrade program. plus, protection from cyber threats at home and now on the go. so staying up to date is easier than ever. you look great by the way. right? unbeatable internet. made to do anything so you can do anything. only xfinity will upgrade your tech after 3 years for a more reliable connection. get that and more with xfi complete. upgrade today. welcome back. within the hour we are expecting the senate to vote, at least begin the vote on judge ketanji brown jackson's historic nomination to the supreme court. in just a few minutes i'll talk with the white house's point person on the jackson
confirmation process, former u.s. senator doug jones. while judge jackson's confirmation will be a major campaign promise kept for president biden, it's also shaping up to be the last agenda item he gets through congress before midterm elections. with two senators pouring water on his build back better bill, the legislating calendar could come to a close in just a few minutes when the supreme court vote is gavelled. joining me is an eternal optimist, washington democratic congressman pramila jayapal. i know you're eternally optimistic but let's get realistic here. it feels like november has gotten a lot closer and suddenly the ability -- the ability to negotiate continues to narrow. how -- you know, what -- i've seen the most optimistic view is it's a coin flip whether
something can get through. where are you? >> well, i think we are on a two-track strategy. we're trying to push as hard as we can for anything we can get through and keep doing that legislatively, but that's also why we rolled out an executive action agenda at the beginning of january. we started talking about it, rolled it out a few weeks ago. we've already ticked off five or six of those items on that executive agenda list that will raise wages and lower costs for the american people. and so those are things that the president can do unilaterally with executive action. they're not as good, chuck, as legislation so i'm not trying to make the argument that they are. but i am trying to say that these will just continue to add to the ways in which we bring relief to a lot of families still struggling across the country. and so we're moving both tracks and i'm very optimistic on the executive agenda front. i am still hopeful on the legislative front. we're not giving up. >> can i -- i want to channel something that i've heard. i've been traveling a lot more
over the last couple of months and talking to folks outside of this acela corridor here. and the question is, hey, can you just do one thing? how about just doing the child tax credit or how about just doing universal pre-k or prince prescription drugs or i've heard student loan relief. can you do one, and if you pick one, what is viable? >> well, i think that the thing we have been talking about is scaled down. it is some combination of tax reform, which is a big deal to make the wealthiest pay their fair share and pay for all of this, prescription drug reform which would be a big deal to lower costs for the american people on prescription drugs and then climate -- some portion of action on climate change for sure. and then the question is can we also get something on the care economy. i'll just tell you, chuck, whether it's the child tax credit or whether it's child
student debt. >> and what should be -- let me go deep on that. what should be the parameters of who gets their debt cancelled? what is the -- who should be in that group of people? >> yeah. well, here's how i think about it. when i ran for congress in 2016, student debt was at $1.3 trillion. today student debt is at $1.9 trillion. a lot of this money is money that the federal government makes and that these debt collectors make on interest rates that are higher than what we actually need to be charging. and so this is -- you know, if you look at the whole issue, it's like why would we work against ourselves if the objective is to get as many people educated as possible with the highest qualifications, whether it's a community college or whether it's a four-year college or a trade school, and
get them into jobs where they can support themselves and their families. so this all shows that as much debt as you can cancel, you may know that i'm for cancelling all of it. but as much debt as you can cancel is going to stimulate the economy. last fact here is that if we were to cancel all of the debt that's out there, we would raise the wealth of black families in america by 40%. this is a racial justice issue as well. >> why wouldn't you means test that? >> well, i think that the principal is that so many people have debt and we've made education so unaffordable that the small percentage of people who can afford to pay it back is not worth the barriers that you would construct to getting it out to the people that need it. people think that means testing is the answer, but it puts barriers in the way that actually slow down getting the
help to the people who need it the most. >> is it easier to wipe away the interest first? >> i mean i think wiping away the interest doesn't really do it because here's another really interesting thing that i've learned over the last couple of years. the fastest growing demographic of people with student debt now is elders. it's seniors on fixed income who are either still paying off their student debt or taking over the debt of their kids or grandkids who can't afford it and they're on fixed incomes. so sometimes we overthink this stuff in trying to parse it down, when the studies actually show that we would have a net economic benefit. here's what happens. when you free up student debt payments for people, it's not like they sock away that money. they put it into buying cars, houses, whatever, so it stimulates the economy through their purchases. >> congresswoman, i know you've got to go. i appreciate you giving me a few minutes. it's always good to get your perspective. so thank you. >> thank you so much, chuck.
all right, let me switch topics here a little bit. i've got former alabama senator doug jones. he was tapped by the white house to help sherpa, guide the supreme court nominee, judge ketanji brown jackson through the senate confirmation process. senator jones, it's good to see you. let me start with what -- look, you've served in the senate. how many people privately said to you in these meetings what susan collins, lisa murkowski and mitt romney are saying publicly, that this process is broken? >> oh, i think everybody is saying that from top to bottom, both sides of the aisle are saying that. this is a process that has gotten really political and that's really unfortunate. it's unfortunate for the country and unfortunate for this nominee. in a different time and a different place, she would have got 80, 90 votes, almost unanimous. but we are where we are. i hope that senators on both sides of the aisle will take a good long look, put the past
behind them, and let's go forward. >> how many of these republican senators do you think if they didn't think voting for her would get weaponized against them by, you know, some echo chamber conservative media would have been voting for her today, just based on the conversations you've had? >> you know, it's hard to say, chuck. i think there are a number in that category, but there's also a number that legitimately believe that she has a judicial philosophy that's a little bit too liberal for what they can stand. and then there's some that were just going to be a no, period, because she was nominated by a democratic president. it's really difficult to say. we had some amazing meetings. everyone in those private meetings treated her with a lot of respect, very civil, very good questions. we were very thankful for that. >> it seems like what you're saying is when there's no cameras, things go well. and the minute a camera comes on, it's suddenly political theater. i mean, look, i say this
hesitantly because i am a sunshine person, i work in this business where, you know, i want everything to be on the record. but would this process be better served if it were off camera, say like the supreme court, but maybe just on audio? >> you know, it's tough to say, chuck. i do think that the cameras bring a certain dynamic that brings out the worst in some people, there's no question about that, especially if those folks are trying to build a face for higher office. at the same time, we are a country that i think needs to be as transparent as possible. i think what we need is a little bit more discipline among those that when the lights shine on them to do a real serious job and not play to those cameras. i think that's the issue. i think voters have as much say on that as anybody else. >> i don't know if you've been able to talk to judge jackson today, but if you have, how's she feeling? >> i have not today. we've been pretty busy getting ready for this vote. having been with her for the last couple of months, i can
tell you she is nervous, she is anxious. she doesn't as we say in the south count her chickens before they're hatched but at the same time she is so excited. she understands the magnitude of what she's about to undergo and she understands the inspiration that this nomination brings to millions of people. what i don't think she fully appreciates is the inspiration that she as a person brings to so many people. i think that's what's affected the people that have worked with her so much is her and her ability to bring that grace, to bring that education, to bring everything to this job is really an inspiring story. >> i was just going to say, i mean have you sort of been able to see some of these anecdotes? look, she's in the middle of this and probably feels like she's in the barrel. she doesn't get to see the positive. have you been able to share with her the positive that you've been able to observe? >> yeah, we've shared the positive. but i tell you what's been more important for her. her chambers has been inundated with cards and letters and
emails from people all over the country. children, their parents. it has really been -- we've seen some of those where she and her assistant brought those in. those have pushed her on. those have been inspiring to her as it has been for all of us. so she gets a sense and feels, i think, the weight of the history. but if there is any one person in this country that can carry that weight of history, it will be ketanji brown jackson. >> senator doug jones, it was really good to get you and i know you're busy, you're about to finish your sherpaing. it's not over yet. as you say, you're not counting your chickens, but i'm sure it was an honor to be involved in this. >> absolutely. thanks, chuck. bye-bye. >> you got it. we'll of course bring you the actual vote as it happens. for that i'm going to be joined by former senator carol moseley braun who knows a thing or two about breaking barriers in this town. just when you thought the political divide in this country
could not get any wider, we've got data that suggests the divide is still growing. our friend kornacki is here and will break it down next. you're watching "meet the press daily." watching "meet the pres daily. ♪ (dispatch) ♪ i want it noooooow! ♪ (vo) get 5g that's ready right now. i just heard something amazing! one medication is approved to treat and prevent migraines. don't take if allergic to nurtec. the most common side effects were nausea, stomach pain, and indigestion. ask your doctor about nurtec today! subway® has so much new they couldn't fit it in their last ad. like new smashed avocado and artisan italian bread. 100% wild-caught tuna. hold up! 100% wild-caught tuna ain't new! subway®'s always had 100% wild-caught tuna! y'all tried to sneak one in on the chuckster! ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ see him? he's not checkin' the stats. he's finding some investment ideas with merrill. eyes on the ball baby. digital tools so impressive, you just can't stop. what would you like the power to do? finally. our honeymoon. it took awhile, but at least we got a great deal on our hotel with kayak. i was afraid we wouldn't go.. with our divorce and.... great divorce guys. yeah... search 100s of travel sites at once. kayak. search one and done. okay, this is a freezer, not a time capsule. sometimes the house itself can tell you how a young homeowner is turning into their parents. -not those two. -yep, they're gone.
-forever? -yep. that there is progressive's homequote explorer website, where i compared home insurance rates. we don't need to print the internet. some are beyond help. i will give you $100 if you can tell me what this is. -scotch egg. -it's a meatball. progressive can't help you from becoming your parents, but we can help you compare rates on home insurance with homequote explorer. we've got a lot of work to do. why give your family just any eggs when they can enjoy the best? eggland's best. the only eggs with more fresh and delicious taste. plus, superior nutrition. which is now more important than ever. only eggland's best. this is... ♪♪ this is iowa. we just haven't been properly introduced. say hello to the place where rolling hills meets low bills. where our fields, inside and out, are always growing. and where the fun is just getting started. this is iowa.
so, when are you coming to see us? ♪♪ ♪ ♪ with the new schwab starter kit we're rewriting the book on investing 101. new investors can open an account and get $101 to split across the top five stocks in the s&p 500®. you can also unlock short videos, step-by-step guides, and other easy-to-use tools designed for people just getting started. plus, investment professionals are on standby 24/7 if you ever have a question. it's investing 101, reimagined. welcome back. you are looking live here at the senate floor where the final vote to confirm judge ketanji brown jackson, miami native, to the supreme court is going to get under way. we'll keep a close eye on this historic moment and we'll take you there shortly. first, a new look at how the political divide in this country
continues to grow, especially when you look at it through the lens of gender and through the lens of education. steve kornacki is, where else, but at our big board with more on these growing gaps and a hint at who are today's swing voters, if there are any left and, yes, they do exist. steve, take it away. >> i guess the concept of a gender gap not necessarily new to american politics. we've been talking about it for decades. but i think it's striking here some of these numbers if you look at the nbc polling coming out in the first few months of this year in advance of the midterm elections this year. just comparing them to the last midterm election, the 2018 midterm elections. let's show you what i mean. this is the post election study that was done. these are the most comprehensive numbers i think you'll get on the breakdown for the 2018 midterm vote from pew. they found that men went democratic by a two-point margin in the 2018 midterms, women went democratic by an 18-point margin.
so again a gender gap. this was a year, this is about as good as it gets for the democrats, the midterm wave of 2018 when they took back the house. take a look at the average on the generic congressional ballot question, do you want the democrats, do you want the republicans in 2022. the atmosphere overall much more republican friendly so far, but look at the shift here. it's a pronounced shift among men from democrats by 2 in 2018 to in our polling republicans by an 18-point margin. a shift in the republican direction among men of 20 points here. among women, you see it is a shift towards republicans but barely. it's from an 18-point margin for the democrats in '18 and now a 15-point margin in our polls. women favoring democrats by 15 points. that amounts to a gender gap in our polling so far this year of 33 points. so that's -- when we say gender
gap is not new. >> gender canyon. we're going to start calling it a canyon. >> get a different word than gap, something more dramatic. you mentioned too the education divide. so we've established more movement among men than women. then there's this. post election 2018, here's how the groups broke men, women by education level. here's where they are in our polling right now. two things jump out. among men is where you see the double-digit movement toward the republicans. more pronounced, men with a college degree. that's a group that swung hard toward the democrats in the '18 midterms, dramatically in our polling moving toward republicans. that's a huge shift right there. something else that jumps out, remember, '18 an incredibly friendly environment for democrats. women with degrees heavily democratic. in a more republican friendly environment overall, women with degrees have actually gotten more democratic. so this group is really
becoming, women with a college degree is core for the democratic party and its chances. women without degrees, democrats by 3, democrats by 1. as close to a 50-50 group as you're going to see here. one other note i just make here, when you look at this double-digit shift, men without degrees, one thing, the possibility it raises is this issue we've been talking about when it comes to the hispanic vote. is the hispanic vote becoming more of an up-for-grabs electorate here. hispanic voters without degrees in 2018, again the post election study, they went for democrats by a 44-point margin. in 2020 post election survey, this is one of the biggest shifts we saw in 2020. the post election survey showed 30 points of movement in the republican direction among hispanic voters without degrees. again, democrats winning but their margin down to 14 points.
we don't have good polling numbers this early in the year to break it down to that level. but overall i can tell you hispanic voters voted democratic by 47 points in 18. in our polling now, 15 points have been shaved off that in the republican direction. there have been some other polls out there that have that even closer. so i think particularly hispanic voters without college degrees, we've got some evidence that there was significant movement there between '18 and '20 and that could be playing a role here potentially. something to look at in '22. >> we're also seeing geography on the latino vote looks like it's becoming more important than ethnicity. rural latinos voting a little more conservative. it is -- it is the hispanic vote is starting to have the same contours as we've seen in the vote overall and certainly the white vote at times as well. steve kornacki, very interesting. women without college degrees and men with them are your basic swing votes.
throw in hispanics, that's who you'll see targeted the most. i think you're spot on there, mr. kornacki. thank you, sir. >> thanks, chuck. mark your calendars because we're planning that if it's thursday, you're going to see a lot more of kornacki on "meet the press daily." thursday, his day. hopefully you already know if it's thursday, there's also a new episode of our streaming show, meet the press reports. we're taking a deep dive on misinformation within the hispanic community. it airs on nbc news now at 10:30 eastern. we're following breaking news out of new york where the state's attorney general has filed a motion to hold former president trump in civil contempt. he has refused to comply with a court order to hand over documents in response to the investigation into his business dealings. she's asking a court to fine him $10,000 for every day that he refuses to produce these documents. up next, we'll head over to capitol hill where the senate is poised to make history with judge ketanji brown jackson's supreme court confirmation. you're watching "meet the press
daily." daily. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? once-weekly ozempic® can help. ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ♪ oh, oh, oh ♪ ozempic® is proven to lower a1c. most people who took ozempic® reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. and you may lose weight. adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. in adults also with known heart disease, ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. ozempic® helped me get back in my type 2 diabetes zone.
ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. looking to get back in your type 2 diabetes zone? ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. as a main street bank, pnc has helped over 7 million kids develop their passion for learning. and now we're providing 88 billion dollars to support underserved communities... ...helping us all move forward financially. pnc bank: see how we can make a difference for you.
welcome back. you are looking live at the senate floor where in just a few minutes the senate will begin the final vote on judge ketanji brown jackson's confirmation to the supreme court. if she is confirmed, and we expect that she will be, she is set to become the first black woman to sit on the country's highest court. she'll be the sixth woman in the court's history, join three other women justices. it will be the first time four women will be on the court at the same time. it's the first time the majority are not white men. this historic vote will be bipartisan. all 50 democrats and three republicans have indicated that they plan to back judge jackson's nomination. as we prepare to watch this historic moment, with me now, justice correspondent pete williams, capitol hill correspondent ali vitali. also the first black woman to serve in the united states senate, former illinois senator carol moseley braun, kim tignor,
an organization committed to getting a black woman on the supreme court is also here. pete, let me start with you. you sometimes never know how a court changes for a while when a new justice gets there. but give a sense of what you think you expect a justice jackson's contribution to the next court is going to be like. >> sure. there's an old expression that every time there's a new justice, it's a new court, because it does change the interpersonal dynamics. stephen breyer has been somewhat conservative in some areas of the law, especially in administrative law, which is a specialty of his. she won't come with that predisposition. she does come with different experience. she'll be the first member of the supreme court in 30 years, ever since thurgood marshall stepped down, to have any experience defending clients. she was a former public defender. as you know, that was a subject
of contentious questioning for her confirmation hearing. but, you know, every personality is different. breyer had been there a long time. she brings a fresh perspective in. she is especially interested in sentencing, so was he. he was on the sentencing commission, so was she. and she has also got experience in the trial court, so that's something that is another bit of experience. every time a new justice comes in, they bring their own experience and things change. it's pretty hard to say precisely how it will change, but we know it won't change as you said the overall dynamic of the court. it will still have a 6-3 super majority. >> the chief justice, john roberts, every once in a while will express concerns about the political perception, the politicizing the court, the fact that he wants to emphasize the robes are black, they're not red or blue.
do you expect him to comment about how the confirmation process has gotten more broken, how there's a lot of calls, you know, when it comes to justice thomas and the whole ginni thomas thing? if he's going to make his concerns known, how would he do that? >> the first answer to your question is no, i don't expect him to do that. he has said privately that he thinks the confirmation process is a mess. i think many justices on the supreme court who have gone through it feel the same way. but he's never -- i mean this is hardly the first contentious supreme court confirmation hearing we've had. he's never spoken up about it. i don't think this will make any difference there. in terms of the thomas thing with the texts and all that, you know, he's got one thing that other justices -- chief justices haven't faced and that's a rising move in congress to actually require supreme court justices to abide by a set of ethical standards. right now it's pretty -- it's pretty much up to each
individual justice. not only is the chief justice not likely to say anything publicly about it, he's unlikely to say anything privately to justice thomas, for example. it's just not something that chief justices do. yes, of course he's concerned about the public perception. the supreme court's credibility seems to be falling in the polls. that's something that concerns all of them. you hear them all talk about that perception. they keep saying, no, we're not junior league politicians, read our opinions two of them said this week, but i don't think it's anything john roberts will talk about publicly or privately. >> pete williams, i know you've got some other people asking for a little bit of your time so i will let you go. pete williams, thank you. i want to turn to carol moseley braun. we've had a conversation about this before, but just tell me the significance of this for you as you watch this. >> well, thank you very much for
having me on, i really appreciate that. and i want to send out my thanks to doug jones who has done a great job shepherding or as you call it sherpaing judge jackson through the process. the process is broken. and the fact is that this judge, judge jackson will be the first since 1789, the first african american woman to serve on the supreme court of the united states. and we all know what an impact the supreme court has on our daily lives. i mean my whole life path was made possible because of the warren court and what thurgood marshall did and getting rid of segregation and changing the united states. and so i was able to sit on the front of buses, i was able to get served in restaurants, i was able to live where i wanted to live, i was able to get married like i wanted to. so because of that court's influence, and while judge jackson will not change the
overall construction of the court, it won't go from being a conservative court to a liberal court because of her, at the same time, she will bring her life experiences to their conversations, their deliberations about cases and that will have a huge impact an that will have a huge impact on the decisions of the supreme court. it's significant and important that she be confirmed today. >> let me bring in kim. you are part -- you start an organization to make this moment possible and you have to feel some sense of -- not of just egg sult taeugs here. >> when we first started calling for the first black woman to be
on the supreme court justice, a lot of members of our own community were saying does this woman exist? we started to create a list of phenomenal black women from across the country that were ready to jump into that position at day one. what this day signals is that now and forever we will never be asked that question again. this woman exists. not only did we make history in this confirmation process, we also made history in what a supreme court short list can look like, and for now and forever, we have young people, young women that see a path to the supreme court, as a civil rights leader, as a path to the supreme court -- we have made a lot of history over the entire confirmation process. i cannot feel prouder. just to build on the points made earlier about the integrity and
the peoples' faith in the court. i have to tell you how jackson handled that, the warmth, humanity, kindness and brilliance she brought to that moment was an inspiration for us as a people when we came to realize these nine justices, they are not nine people locked away in a tower making decisions that affect our lives, and no, they are real people and this is a person that will bring our lives into perspective as part of this deliberative body. >> do you think your job is done or just beginning? >> our job is just beginning. >> that was a beautiful alley-oop, so thank you. we have a traditional tracker on
our website. we are tracking the nomination of every black woman being made and we still have a lot of history to make. these are the lifelines that need to be cultivated and supported constantly. they are just that fragile and that important. there's still less than 2% of the federal judiciary, and this is part of building the public's faith in the judiciary, and ensuring that, and we are very proud of this moment. >> right now kamala harris is in the chair. you are vote is not exactly seen as necessary here, but let's listen in. >> mr. -- >> no. >> mr. bennett? >> aye.
>> mr. hawley, no. mr. hickenlooper? >> aye. >> mr. hickenlooper, aye. >> ms. hyde-smith, no. >> mr. inhofe, no. mr. johnson? >> mr. johnson, no. >> mr. kaine? >> aye. >> mr. kaine, aye. >> mr. kelly? >> aye. >> mr. kelly, aye. >> mr. kennedy? >> no. >> mr. kennedy, no. >> mr. king? >> aye. >> mr. king, aye. >> ms. klobuchar?
>> aye. >> ms. klobuchar, aye. >> mr. leahy? >> aye. >> mr. leahy, aye. >> mr. lee? >> no. >> mr. lee, no. >> mr. lujan? >> aye. >> mr. lujan, aye. >> ms. lum m. >> no. >> mr. manchin? >> aye. >> manchin, aye. mr. markey? >> mr. marshall? >> no. >> mr. mcconnell? >> no. >> mr. mcconnell, no. >> mr. ma mendez? >> aye. >> mr. merkley? >> aye. >> mr. merkley, aye. >> mr. moran. mr. moran voted in the negative.
>> ms. murkowski? >> aye. >> ms. murray? >> ms. murray, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. mr. padilla? >> aye. >> mr. padilla, aye. mr. paul? mr. peters? >> aye. >> mr. peters, aye. mr. courtman? >> no. >> mr. portman, no. mr. reed. >> romney? >> aye. >> mr. romney, aye. ms. rosen? >> ms. rosen, aye. mr. rounds? >> no. >> mr. rounds, no. >> mr. rubio? mr. rubio, no. mr. sanders? mr. sanders, aye.
mr. sass, no. mr. shots? mr. shots, aye. mr. schumer? aye. >> mr. schumer, aye. mr. scott of florida. >> no. >> mr. scott of florida, no. mr. scott of south carolina? no. mr. shelby? >> no. >> ms. sinema? >> aye. >> ms. sinema, aye. mr. sullivan? >> no. >> mr. sullivan, no. mr. tester? >> aye. >> mr. tester, aye. mr. thin, no. mr. tillis? mr. tillis, no.